4.6 Article

The novel porcine Lactobacillus sobrius strain protects intestinal cells from enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88 infection and prevents membrane barrier damage

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 137, 期 12, 页码 2709-2716

出版社

AMER SOC NUTRITIONAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1093/jn/137.12.2709

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lactobacilli have a potential to overcome intestinal disorders; however, the exact mode of action is still largely unknown. In this study, we have used the intestinal porcine intestinal IPEC-1 epithelial cells as a model to investigate a possible protective activity of a new Lactobacillus species, the L. sobrius DSM 16698 T, against intestinal injury induced by enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) K88 infection and the underlying mechanisms. Treatment of infected cells with L. sobrius strongly reduced the pathogen adhesion. L. sobrius was also able to prevent the ETEC-incluced membrane damage by inhibiting delocalization of zonula occludens (ZO)-1, reduction of occludin amount, rearrangement of F-actin, and dephosphorylation of occludin caused by ETEC. RT-PCR and ELISA experiments showed that L. sobrius counteracted the ETEC-induced increase of IL-8 and upregulated the IL-10 expression. The involvement of IL-8 in the deleterious effects of ETEC was proven by neutralization of IL-8 with a specific antibody. A crucial role of IL-10 was indicated by blockage of IL-10 production with neutralizing anti-IL-10 antibody that fully abrogated the L. sobrius protection. L. sobrius was also able to inhibit the internalization of ETEC, which was likely favored by the leaking barrier. The protective effects were not found with L. amylovorus DSM 2053 1 T treatment, a strain derived from cattle waste but phylogenetically closely related to L. sobrius. Together, the data indicate that L. sobrius exerts protection against the harmful effects of ETEC by different mechanisms, including pathogen adhesion inhibition and maintenance of membrane barrier integrity through IL-10 regulation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据